It may as well be antiracism, since it's essentially the same as all the other liberal excuses to divert blame away from blacks.
Blame the owners, like an actual racist.
There was a recent video of some faggot talking to Howard Jew about pitbulls and he mentioned hatred for the breed is "dog racism", but I'm sure none of you watched to the end when that fag made a good point about how "thugs are attracted to the breed".
And yes, the breed is less aggressive than chihuahuas. The dog's behavior is absolutely related to their owner's, comparing dog breeds to races and blaming the breed over the owner is falling into the medja trap of blaming blacks exclusively for their culture and ignoring their *owners* (cuz for example they didn't create crack or gangster rap thenselves).
Typical pitbull attack is one of two scenarios:
1. Mudshark adopts a stray and takes pictures of it "cuddling" with her mulatto baby because she's addicted to social medja. And then the dog smells a meal.
2. Pitbull gets loose in the ghetto and mauls a black kid.
These are 99% of pitbull attacks. They are in the ghetto or they are stray found in the ghetto adopted by irresponsible people who don't know how to properly train them.
You want to cull pitbulls, when they almost exclusively attack blacks in the ghetto, and you think you're racist? You're not racist, you're an antiracist protecting blacks, both physically from their natural predator and politically from the blame of being the exclusive cause of the problem.
You want to blame the breed and not the dogfighting rings that mistrain the breed into violent beasts? You're just a libtard making excusing for blacks. Blame the owners like a real racist. Your *dog racism* is cringe and gay.
Why? Most people alive today have been convinced that race doesn't exist. *Nobody* has been convinced that breeds do not exist among dogs, excluding that kike and whoever thinks that he is right.
Imagine being a dog breed denialist. Yet that's effectively what this is: race denialism extrapolated to dogs, resulting in the ludicrous, false claim that every dog is essentially equal and that the idea that one breed of dog is somehow in its nature more violent than another is simply overgeneralization and what we might call 'breed-ism', analogous to racism.
'Hey, you, you little soycialist, I'm a Great Dane supremacist, and I discriminate against chihuahuas. What are you going to do about it, you little soycialist faggot?'
'I'll have you know that I'm a committed anti-breedist and an avowed opponent of discrimination in all its forms! Your anti-chihuahua breedism is completely and utterly unacceptable! I'm part of Anti-Breedist Action! We know that you secretly want to gas six million chihuahuas, you dirty chihuahua-phobe! No room for breedism! This is an Anti-Breedist Zone! All Breedists Are Bastards! ABAB! Chihuahua Lives Matter!'
Types are divisible into sub-types: people who get het up about all of these '-isms' and '-phobias', for whom the world is perpetually divided into top dogs and underdogs, are all loser pieces of garbage. They all think that if a perceived oppressor would just stop withholding *something* that is supposedly kept from them, that their garbage lives and the lives of other garbage would somehow improve. It's all just a coping mechanism. 'My life is only contingently bad because I'm oppressed, but the true me is good. I would have all this power, wealth, and success if it wasn't for the oppressor!'
These people say that they hate the 'oppressor'. That is only superficially true. Actually, the idea of being oppressed is psychologically *beneficial* to these people, because it gives them an immediate excuse for each and every one of their myriad failings. It is also cognitively simple, requiring no great intelligence to comprehend or communicate. That is why they will *never* let go of this idea. They are the professionally oppressed, just like Obama was once labelled a 'professional nigger' by some groid comedian. It is like their drug of choice. 'If I am not oppressed... to whom then can blame be shifted? Don't I have to accept that blame belongs to me, something which hurts, something which I desperately wish to avoid? No, I can't accept that. So I am oppressed.'
No, there is no oppressor withholding anything from these people. What is this 'bourgeoisie', without whom you would supposedly live in material super-abundance? What is this 'patriarchy'? What are all of these supposed 'systems' from which emanate systemic this and systemic that? By claiming that you are oppressed without any oppressive agents, only oppressive structures, your oppression becomes unfalsifiable!
The self-styled oppressed are simply the detritus of humanity positivizing themselves, declaring themselves good. The detritus of humanity, possessing only immutably bad natures, ever immersing themselves in falsehoods, ever reaping the consequences of bad decisions. But accepting that one is nothing more than detritus is displeasing, to say the least, hence all their fantasies about how they have a true inner goodness, true inner talents, etc., all of which would radiate outwards and manifest themselves in all kinds of achievements and successes were it not for the power of an oppressor preventing that from happening.